Charges uncertain in Blackwater shooting

[Lone_Star_Dem]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON - The State Department promised Blackwater USA bodyguards immunity from prosecution in its investigation of last month's deadly shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians, The Associated Press has learned.

As a result, it will likely be months before the United States can — if ever — bring criminal charges in the case that has infuriated the Iraqi government.

<snip>

It's not clear why the Diplomatic Security investigators agreed to give immunity to the bodyguards, or who authorized doing so.

Bureau of Diplomatic Security chief Richard Griffin last week announced his resignation, effective Thursday. Senior State Department officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have said his departure was directly related to his oversight of Blackwater contractors.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071029/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/blackwater_prosecutions

[Kagemusha]

1. This is stupid. Immunity does not depend on anything investigators say.

It cannot be rescinded by the State Department. They don't have the power to rescind it. They can't unilaterally rescind Order 17 of the CPA that made them immune under Iraqi law either. So they were immune when they committed the crimes. What, people think that they'll have immunity stripped and the Blackwater people will be tried for actions that weren't criminal (for them) at the time they were committed? That won't fly in the US. It won't fly in civilized countries. I'm not sure if Iraq (post-Bush invasion) qualifies anymore. But at any rate, to this day, Iraq guarantees that immunity.

So I cannot fathom how the State Department could PROMISE immunity. This defies logic. The State Department could inform Blackwater personnel that they had immunity, which would be factually correct. That immunity does not rely on the whims of the State Department or employees thereof, not Rice, not Crocker, not any of them.

Yes, there's a law to prosecute contractors working for the US Military, but the State Department is not, under any logical standard, part of the US Military. Prosecuting civilians under court-martial is not likely to be constitutional. If you can't do it to Padilla, you can't do it to Blackwater.

[tridim]

3. We're talking about Bush's State Department.

The law does not apply.

[Kagemusha]

4. Meaning what here?

That any state dept employee can be just carted off to a firing squad and shot because "The law does not apply." ? That's not going to improve the situation any.

[tridim]

5. I don't know what it means..

I'm just pissed off. Sorry.

BushCo gets away with everything, this wont be any different.

[Kagemusha]

6. That's okay, this is a rotten to the core situation...

being pissed off is the correct reaction...

[barbtries]

29. murdering civilians was legal for them when they did it?

[Kagemusha]

43. Frankly, pretty much.

And it's legal 99.9% of the time (or more) when the US military does similar behavior.

The ROE that Blackwater operated under only makes SOME sense when considering that they are protecting US diplomats in a war zone where the US military is not committed to supporting them. That ROE, in any civilized country in a sane legal regime, would be considered orders by State Department officials to commit organized, regular murder of law-abiding citizens. In Iraq, it is called the terms of the contract approved of by Uncle Sam and his lawyers.

And Iraq has only just begun the first tiny baby steps to challenge this state of affairs. As contractors are not sane enough to work under such aggressive ROE's in a legal regime that does not provide them with immunity for their actions, Iraq can chase them out, though at what cost I'm not sure yet. It's a huge cost to Bush's plans at least.

[tridim]

2. Arrest the unnamed State Dept official too.

And then arrest anyone else involved in the cover up of these murders, all the way to the top.

God fucking dammit, why do we let this crap happen. :( I'm just sick of it all, and it needs to stop NOW. I'm starting to believe that the "unless they get caught with a dead girl or live boy" meme is not applicable any more, nothing would be done.

[IDemo]

7. Blackwater bodyguards promised immunity

Source: Associated Press


WASHINGTON - The State Department promised Blackwater USA bodyguards immunity from prosecution in its investigation of last month’s deadly shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians, The Associated Press has learned.

As a result, it will likely be months before the United States can — if ever — bring criminal charges in the case that has infuriated the Iraqi government.

“Once you give immunity, you can’t take it away,” said a senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.

A State Department spokesman did not have an immediate comment Monday. Both Justice Department spokesman Dean Boyd and FBI spokesman Rich Kolko declined comment.



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21533017/

[bullimiami]

8. that sure doesnt seem legal.

if the state department can just grant immunity to whoever they please without review why do we have a department of justice.

[IDemo]

10. State Dept is part of the Executive Branch

motto: "Immunity and Impunity for over a sixteenth of a Century!"

[kickysnana]

9. I am sure that the Nazi's were too but they are still hunting them down. n/t

[Deny and Shred]

11. Beyond Belief

Among many outrageous aspects is the fact that the State Dept. let both the Justice Dept and FBI conduct investigations, knowing full well they'd already granted immunity. I thought The Administtration was trying to improve cooperation between departments. How many investigators were flown over, spent how long gathering info to find it's basically a dead end. Now, the FBI has a month-old crime scene to investigate. The State Dept could have saved those guys a lot of trouble. Your tax dollars at work.
I honestly think there is a master plan to wring out the honest people still left in government agencies by making sure any efforts at actual justice bear no fruit.
Condi, "You're doing a heckuva job."

[rAVES]

12. Hardly beyond belief at this stage..

Nothing bloody surprises me anymore...

[Kagemusha]

13. As I said on an earlier thread, State can't give or revoke immunity at this point.

The immunity is hard wired into Iraqi law, and since US law has no provision for these people being charged with anything domestically - no jurisdiction for mere criminality, and Congress didn't create a law so that people working for State, as opposed to the military, can be prosecuted under court-martial - there's no NEED for immunity to be promised. It's there whether State promises it or not and State has no power to remove it.

Read and weep, because nothing we say here is going to make retroactive prosecution legal under the Constitution.

[The Stranger]

22. I'm not sure how the Congress can grant immunity for criminal acts committed in another sovereign

nation. And if Iraqi law has "hard wired" immunity into it, which would be subject to challenge in itself, then try them under international common law.

[Kagemusha]

23. It's not a matter of granting. US courts have no jurisdiction!

Federal courts in NY State do not have jurisdiction for traffic violations in Ontario, Canada. That's basic sovereignty. Iraq does not belong to the US. Unless there is a law that specifically makes the contractors part of the US Military for purposes of the law - and there is such a law, but it does not apply to State Dept contractors at all - there is no grounds for US jurisdiction! Forget immunity, it's not needed.

As for "international common law", I don't have one single clue what that is.

[The Stranger]

38. I have read that first paragraph four times, but it contains so many clauses and incomplete

statements (without punctuation), I can't understand what the fuck you are saying.

Iraq can prosecute crimes committed within its jurisdiction, correct?

[Kagemusha]

40. Yeah Iraq can prosecute crimes in Iraq, provided there's no immunity.

And just today (Tuesday), Iraq seems to be moving to remove that immunity.

I apologize for my grammar. Having to repeat the same post four or five times (and then giving up because the same flawed story was posted 7 or 8 times) made me sloppy.

With this particular Blackwater case, the problem is simple: Iraq would be prosecuting people for crimes that they were previously immune for, retroactively. Retroactive prosecutions are unconstitutional in the US and against basic principles of justice throughout the Western world. I'm not saying it won't be tried - I'm just saying that it'd be kangaroo court justice if it was attempted.

Also, I don't think there's any way the US is handing US citizens over to the tender mercies of Iraq's "justice" system.

It's almost totally besides the point, anyway. The REAL issue is not this one incident, but the legal regime under which similar contractors (Blackwater or otherwise) will exist in Iraq in the future... or if the removal of immunity will cause mass contractor flight out of the country, which should cripple the occupation in dramatic ways.

[The Stranger]

41. Okay.

With this particular Blackwater case, the problem is simple: Iraq would be prosecuting people for crimes that they were previously immune for, retroactively. Retroactive prosecutions are unconstitutional in the US and against basic principles of justice throughout the Western world. I'm not saying it won't be tried - I'm just saying that it'd be kangaroo court justice if it was attempted.

The prohibition against ex post facto prosecution involves changing the law to crminalize conduct that had already been committed. Here, the conduct has always been criminal. It has always been against the law. That they were once somehow immunized (allegedly) from prosecution and that this was later removed would not violate the prohibition against crminalizing conduct ex post facto. The law was always on the books. And it most FUCKING certainly wouldn't be a "kangaroo court justice if it was attempted."

Also, I don't think there's any way the US is handing US citizens over to the tender mercies of Iraq's "justice" system.

Not really the issue. If U.S. citizens commit crimes in other countries, those countries have the right, if not the obligation, to prosecute such crimes. U.S. citizens are not supermen and superwomen who have free reign to murder people the world over.

[Kagemusha]

44. I take it you didn't pay attention to the trial of Saddam Hussein?

That certainly established in my mind the low quality of Iraqi "justice". Even if the Blackwater shooters are guilty as sin, as I believe, an Iraqi trial is not going to be fair; it will be a political show trial.

Anyway, your issues are legitimate and I don't mean to underplay them. But, I spent a little time thinking about this (well before your post, mind you) - let's say a person is pardoned, and then prosecuted later for the same crime under the principle that the pardon is illegitimate because it was granted for poor reasons. US courts would still throw the prosecution out. Un-pardoning people is just not done and isn't considered just, if for no other reason, than because people are expected to know for sure what the law is in advance so that they have a fair and just opportunity to follow it.

I realize the next argument is, "Immunity doesn't count because the shootings were outside the scope of the contract." No, they weren't. The scope of the contract is inhumanly broad; Uncle Sam is A-OK with contractors working for it committing what Iraq considers to be premeditated murder. This isn't the first incident, after all! There's a long string of these that have gone completely unpunished.

Yes, the US could turn around and declare Blackwater's actions outside the contract anyway - which I believe to be a lie - and try to avoid responsibility for its own inhuman rules of engagement (which are liberally applied by the US Military as well, for which extremely few punishments have been meted out). But the whole thing is stupid. Either you're going to have contractors doing this kind of high risk security work in a war zone or you aren't. If you are, they won't work for you if they're at the mercy of local laws - as they should be in any free, sovereign country. The whole system's rotten.

I just don't think the fact the whole system's rotten is going to get these particular individuals hanging from Iraqi nooses on public television.

[scarface2004]

14. zeig heil blackwater!!!!!

we are nazi scum now....lining up woman and children against the wall and shooting them in the back for the lust of killing!!!!! may war crime trials sentence all too death by hanging!!!!!

[Danieljay]

15. Immunity deal hampers Blackwater inquiry

Source: Associated Press - Yahoo

WASHINGTON - The State Department promised Blackwater USA bodyguards immunity from prosecution in its investigation of last month's deadly shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians, The Associated Press has learned.



The immunity deal has delayed a criminal inquiry into the Sept. 16 killings and could undermine any effort to prosecute security contractors for their role in the incident that has infuriated the Iraqi government.

"Once you give immunity, you can't take it away," said a senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.

State Department officials declined to confirm or deny that immunity had been granted. One official — who refused to be quoted by name_ said: "If, in fact, such a decision was made, it was done without any input or authorization from any senior State Department official in Washington."



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071029/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/blackwater_prosecutions

---

Welcome the American Gestapo.

[jody]

16. Then Commander in Chief * should give immunity to all military personnel. n/t

[pinniped]

17. Obviously it has not infuriated the Iraqis enough to actually kick their....

asses out of their so-called sovereign country.

the incident that has infuriated the Iraqi government.

[DeSwiss]

18. Here's the guy who gave the immunity.....

....and then fell on his sword.

"It's not clear why the Diplomatic Security investigators agreed to give immunity to the bodyguards, or who authorized doing so.

Bureau of Diplomatic Security chief Richard Griffin last week announced his resignation, effective Thursday. Senior State Department officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, have said his departure was directly related to his oversight of Blackwater contractors."


- "Remember, you can make a RepukeBot do anything....."

K&R!

[superconnected]

19. Time to take away their imunity. Murder is murder.

[superconnected]

20. US Promises Imunity to Blackwater

Source: ap

WASHINGTON - The State Department promised Blackwater USA bodyguards immunity from prosecution in its investigation of last month's deadly shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians, The Associated Press has learned.

The immunity deal has delayed a criminal inquiry into the Sept. 16 killings and could undermine any effort to prosecute security contractors for their role in the incident that has infuriated the Iraqi government.

"Once you give immunity, you can't take it away," said a senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.

State Department officials declined to confirm or deny that immunity had been granted. One official — who refused to be quoted by name_ said: "If, in fact, such a decision was made, it was done without any input or authorization from any senior State Department official in Washington."


Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/blackwater_prosecutions

[bbinacan]

21. Does the State Dept.

have authority to do this? Bizarre.

[Kagemusha]

24. The AP must be royally confused. I'll say it again...

State doesn't NEED to promise immunity, it already exists because US courts have no jurisdiction - Congress hasn't even tried to give them any where these types of contractors are concerned, and there's no Iraqi law they can be held to account under at present. (And at any rate Iraqi "justice" is dubious to begin with.) It's hard for me to believe that what the AP thinks is a promise of immunity, actually is.

After all, if a State lawyer told the Blackwater employees that they COULD NOT be prosecuted, that is not an offer of immunity - that is a statement of fact that they have nothing to fear from prosecution. At present, this is objectively true.

[williesgirl]

25. Immunity Jeopardizes Iraq Probe - Guards' Statements Cannot Be Used in Blackwater Case

Source: Washington Post

Potential prosecution of Blackwater guards allegedly involved in the shooting deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians last month may have been compromised because the guards received immunity for statements they made to State Department officials investigating the incident, federal law enforcement officials said yesterday.

FBI agents called in to take over the State Department's investigation two weeks after the Sept. 16 shootings cannot use any information gleaned during questioning of the guards by the department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, which is charged with supervising security contractors.

Some of the Blackwater guards have subsequently refused to be interviewed by the FBI, citing promises of immunity from State, one law enforcement official said. The restrictions on the FBI's use of their initial statements do not preclude prosecution by the Justice Department using other evidence, the official said, but "they make things a lot more complicated and difficult."

snip

It is unclear when or by whom the grant of immunity was explained to the guards. Under federal case law applying to government workers, only voluntary answers to questions posed by the employing agency can be used against them in a criminal prosecution. If an employee is ordered to answer under threat of disciplinary action, the resulting statements cannot be used.



Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/29/AR2007102901266.html?hpid=topnews

---

This is BULLSHIT. So much for Condi's lies last week, she already gave them immunity. Someone has to stop these criminals NOW, and then go after the Blackwater criminals as well.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enrique]

27. do U.S. troops have immunity?

if not, this should be politcially explosive.

[The Backlash Cometh]

28. Well, can we prosecute the State Dept. by proxy?

By what authority do they have to give a private corpo immunity?

[dipsydoodle]

30. Blackwater men 'given immunity'

Source: BBC News

Private US security contractors accused of shooting dead 17 innocent Iraqis may have been offered partial immunity by the US state department, say reports.

Unnamed officials said the offer was unauthorised and could make it much more difficult to prosecute the guards employed by the Blackwater firm.

If confirmed, the revelation may put further strain on US-Iraq relations.

The Iraqi government was furious at the 16 September deaths, and demanded the guards be handed over to face trial.



Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7068600.stm

[krispos42]

31. I think at some point...

...the Iraqi military is just going to shell some Blackwater compound with some 155mm artillery out of sheer fustration.

[laststeamtrain]

32. WP: Blackwater guards got immunity in Iraq deaths

Blackwater guards got immunity in Iraq deaths
State Dept. deal could undermine prosecution efforts

By Karen DeYoung, Washington Post | October 30, 2007

WASHINGTON - Potential prosecution of Blackwater guards accused in the shooting deaths of 17 Iraqi civilians last month may have been compromised because the guards received immunity for statements they made to State Department officials investigating the case, federal law enforcement officials said yesterday.

FBI agents called in to take over the State Department's investigation two weeks after the Sept. 16 shootings cannot use any information gleaned during questioning of the guards by the department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security, which is responsible for supervising security contractors.

Some of the Blackwater guards have subsequently refused to be interviewed by the FBI, citing promises of immunity from the State Department, one law enforcement official said.

The restrictions on the FBI's use of their initial statements do not preclude prosecution by the Justice Department using other evidence, the official said, but "they make things a lot more complicated and difficult."

<more>

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/10/30/blackwater_guards_got_immunity_in_iraq_deaths/
*

[shaniqua6392]

33. King George is not going to let anything happen to the guards

and there is not a damn thing Iraq can do about it. They can bitch and moan but nothing will happen. That is the consequence they pay for their little deal with the devil named Bush. The Iraqi government is just as crooked as the Bush Administration and they are just putting up a little fuss to appease the Iraqi population. Just make it look like you are horrified that Iraqi civilians were killed and after a little while everyone will forget about them.

[OKNancy]

34. earlier thread here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=3046729

[dipsydoodle]

35. Thanks

I obviously didn't look back far enough.

[tom_paine]

36. Bushie Murderers ALWAYS go free.

Hell, often these days they are not even searched for very much before the tanked investigation peters out amid state-sanctioned lies and stonewalling.

The Bushie who sent the anrthax in Oct. 2001 - free as a bird.
Former (and probably current) Bushie Employee Osama bin Laden is free as a bird and probably enjoying momthly stipeds from Bushie Black Ops or Slush Fund monies.
The Bushie who planted three in the forehead of that atheist hippie who dared defy the Bushies and at the same time was foolsihe nough to think he would survive being at their mercy in their Bushie Amemrmacht to come home and win the election for Kerry.

There's more, but I trust I have made my point. Imperial Amerika is an evil and lawless land, under the rule ofthe tyrannical Bushies. Well, like Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union, only lawless for THE PARTY COMRADES.

[maddezmom]

37. the investigators did not have the authority to grant immunity

WASHINGTON (AFP) - State Department investigators offered immunity deals to the security guards working for the firm Blackwater USA involved in a deadly September 16 incident in Baghdad, two top US newspapers reported Tuesday.

The move could complicate efforts to prosecute the guards -- especially since the investigators did not have the authority to grant immunity, unnamed government officials told The New York Times.

Most of the guards involved in the shooting were promised they would not be prosecuted for anything said in their interviews with US investigators, the Times reported, as long as their statements were truthful.

US Justice Department prosecutors who do have the authority to grant immunity had no advance knowledge of the arrangement, the officials told the Times.

The Washington Post reported that FBI agents that took charge of the investigation in early October cannot use any of the information obtained from questions by the State Department office in charge of supervising security contractors

more:http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071030/ts_afp/iraqusunrestsecurityblackwater_071030074037;_ylt=AnZT7r8_uNW3MNUnY265PJaQOrgF

The State Department investigators from the agency’s investigative arm, the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, offered the immunity grants even though they did not have the authority to do so, the officials said. Prosecutors at the Justice Department, who do have such authority, had no advance knowledge of the arrangement, they added.

Most of the guards who took part in the Sept. 16 shooting were offered what officials described as limited-use immunity, which means that they were promised that they would not be prosecuted for anything they said in their interviews with the authorities as long as their statements were true. The immunity offers were first reported Monday by The Associated Press.

The officials who spoke of the immunity deals have been briefed on the matter, but agreed to talk about the arrangement only on the condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to discuss a continuing criminal investigation.

The precise legal status of the immunity offer is unclear. Those who have been offered immunity would seem likely to assert that their statements are legally protected, even as some government officials say that immunity was never officially sanctioned by the Justice Department.

more:http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/30/washington/30blackwater.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

[Lone_Star_Dem]

42. Excellent information

Thanks, maddezmom!

[Kagemusha]

45. Well that's quite a legal quagmire.

Notwithstanding that I've argued until I'm blue in the face that there's no way for the Justice Department to legally touch these people to begin with... even if they overcame those hurdles, this is the problem: the guards spoke on condition of immunity believing that is what they had. Granted, lying alone might not be grounds for having statements tossed out but, impersonating an officer of the court and pretending to have authority to grant immunity when that is not the case.. hmm.

I don't know, but if that's allowed left and right, why don't we hear of more such cases state-side, where people are tricked into self-incrimination through false guarantees of immunity?

[Javaman]

39. welcome to the new SS. nt